• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Next-gen Racing Graphics Face-off | (Next-gen means current-gen)

theWB27

Member
So you feel Project Cars having gameplay shots like the other games in the thread is a big restriction on it?

Pcars doesn't have a photomode. As damn near every person who has posted their shots of Pcars it's been of gameplay. They've also posted pics with the HUD up in a traditional racer view.
izo0gvDc4JL40.gif

There are plenty more in this thread. Like your post said...I'm not getting why people are willfully ignoring this and saying create a scenario that lines up with DC so we can compare.

]Doesn't that kind of prove that Drive Club looks better?,[/B] the fact that its only 30fps and PCars is already running at 60fps on PS4 AND has Morpheus support (which needs even more processing power).

Anyway Drive Club looks better to me, you may be able to run PCars at 4k resolutions with 75x trilinear AA or whatever but in terms of actual graphics, Drive Club looks better by a country mile imo.

No.

What does that mean, actual graphics? We are seeing Pcars actual graphics. Resolution, AA matters. Country mile...hyperbole to say the least.
 
Driveclub is the one with the Driveclub logo on the satnav :p

That makes sense :p

Not really... The tunnel part looks horrible on the top one. The bottom one looks more realistic.

Coming out of the tunnel looks bad in the top one, the lighting model in the second looks like it would handle that much better.

But the second one looks more stylized, the top one has a more real look to it. (Not that there's anything wrong with having a stylized look).
 

strata8

Member
has it already been pointed out that its a faked reflection? The thumb of the driver is in the reflection, at the same angle we are looking at it now. Its that same fake reflection effect they used for the hood/world methinks.

It's not faked.

Otm8yl0.png


You can see it's showing the top of the hand and not the side from the camera's perspective. The right of the reflection even shows the sun specular on the steering wheel.
 

twobear

sputum-flecked apoplexy
has it already been pointed out that its a faked reflection? The thumb of the driver is in the reflection, at the same angle we are looking at it now. Its that same fake reflection effect they used for the hood/world methinks.

Huh? No it's not.

qcj1qw4.png
 

Sini

Member
has it already been pointed out that its a faked reflection? The thumb of the driver is in the reflection, at the same angle we are looking at it now. Its that same fake reflection effect they used for the hood/world methinks.
I pointed it out, but after more investigation I saw that they are indeed accurate. Watch that video to see that they are actually reflecting the correct side of hands.
I decided to look for a video of those Forza reflections and it seems like those reflections may actually be accurate. It seemed like they used screen space reflections on that gif to me so it seemed to reflect the same part of hands that driver sees, but I was incorrect. Sorry about that.
This is really good video for looking at those reflections: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESZ199Mjngk
 

VanWinkle

Member
Pcars doesn't have a photomode. As damn near every person who has posted their shots of Pcars it's been of gameplay. They've also posted pics with the HUD up in a traditional racer view.




There are plenty more in this thread. Like your post said...I'm not getting why people are willfully ignoring this and saying create a scenario that lines up with DC so we can compare.



No.

What does that mean, actual graphics? We are seeing Pcars actual graphics. Resolution, AA matters. Country mile...hyperbole to say the least.

I know there are some gameplay shots of the game. I'm not talking about those ones. You said nibs is putting all kinds of restrictions on Project Cars because he wants the same style of screenshot as the other games in this thread!
 

Durante

Member
Just have to agree to disagree then.

Driveclub looks like an artists impression of a sunset. It's pretty and dramatic. PCars looks like realistic daytime lighting, not spectacular but then daytime lighting often isn't. It does look like what my eyes expect to see from realistic daytime lighting though.
That's the major issue. You simply cannot give people a video of a sunset and a noon scene and ask them to judge based on that.

I'm almost certain that if someone posted a sunset and a noon scene of the same game in 2 gifs without stating the game name, you'd get replies saying stuff like "the lighting model is better in the first one". It's very hard, if not impossible, to take a single instance of the result of a rendering method at one time of day in one environment and derive any general conclusion from that.
 

eso76

Member
has it already been pointed out that its a faked reflection? The thumb of the driver is in the reflection, at the same angle we are looking at it now. Its that same fake reflection effect they used for the hood/world methinks.

it couldn't be.
fake reflection effect grabs the screen buffer and uses it as a reflection; it wouldn't work in this case, because you'd see the wheel exactly as you see it from the driver's pov as a reflection.

FM5 does seem to render the cockpit twice, with 2 different virtual cameras (although the one used as a reflection is rendered at 30fps) hence why you get to see what's behind the wheel and stuff that's hidden from your view
 

Gestault

Member
What does that mean, actual graphics? We are seeing Pcars actual graphics. Resolution, AA matters. Country mile...hyperbole to say the least.

If we disregard framerate, image quality, and the detail on any individual trackside object, Driveclub ends up looking pretty good. Hell, it looks great anyway (I don't want to sound overly dismissive), but I'm having the same trouble understanding the qualifiers needed to state simply "it looks the best." Nib saying though that for an ideal comparison, the scenes should be roughly comparable is still fair.

I'm hoping there's a media blowout for both (console) Project Cars and Driveclub in or at E3. I've been pretty happy seeing both these games given long enough time in development to grow into what they should be. This from someone who thinks Forza 5 looks brilliant, especially in light of having come out more than half a year ago with more cars than almost any of the games we're talking about here.
 

Tsundere

Banned
has it already been pointed out that its a faked reflection? The thumb of the driver is in the reflection, at the same angle we are looking at it now. Its that same fake reflection effect they used for the hood/world methinks.

Ummm, that's why the thumb in the reflection is OVER the steering wheel? ?? ?? ??

Doesn't take a genius to see that the reflection is accurate and not baked like other games.
 

Krisprolls

Banned
But the second one looks more stylized, the top one has a more real look to it. (Not that there's anything wrong with having a stylized look).

I disagree. The trees look like 2D pics zooming in the top one (it's PCars that's it ?). The trees look more realistic in the bottom one.

Overall, the lighting in Driveclub is more realistic. PCars has superb cars and wonderful IQ though. They just don't have the budget to make sceneries like Driveclub does (it's a kickstarter after all if I remember correctly...). I think they also target different things since PCars is more a sim while DC is an arcade / car porn game.

DC clearly targets "the most beautiful locations" while PCars focuses more on cars themselves.

We should wait for both releases to compare them anyway.
 
Honestly PCars has its moments where it looks great, but DC is definitely the overall better looking game IMO. I've also been thinking wouldn't PCars be competing against F5 not DC? just some food for thought I guess.
 

RetroStu

Banned
Some people on here remind me of when i used to post on the 'InCrysis' forums where PC fans had a thread where most of them agreed that GoldenEye on N64 running at 1080p/60fps and good AA (Hypothetically of course) would look better than Killzone 2 on PS3 running at 720p/30fps. No, just no.

Its the same with this. PCars may be able to rub at higher res with better AA etc but Drive Club simply looks better, its graphics are better.
 

theWB27

Member
I know there are some gameplay shots of the game. I'm not talking about those ones. You said nibs is putting all kinds of restrictions on Project Cars because he wants the same style of screenshot as the other games in this thread!

Why should Pcars be restricted on what can be shown because we don't have DC in our hands?Evolution is putting DC's best foot forward. There's no reason Pcars or any other racer we're looking shouldn't be able to do the same.

Pcars isn't being faked in the shots we have....it's known it can and does look like that. There's no reason all of that shouldn't be permissible because it can't be reproduced in DC yet.

If we disregard framerate, image quality, and the detail an any individual trackside object, Driveclub ends up looking pretty good. Hell, it looks great anyway (I don't want to sound overly dismissive), but I'm having the same trouble understanding the qualifiers needed to state simply "it looks the best." Nib saying though that for an ideal comparison, the scenes should be roughly comparable is still fair.

I'm hoping there's a media blowout for both (console) Project Cars and Driveclub in or at E3. I've been pretty happy seeing both these games given long enough time in development to grow into what they should be. This from someone who thinks Forza 5 looks brilliant, especially in light of having come out more than half a year ago with more cars than almost any of the games we're talking about here.

To the bolded...I get that. As a caveat, Evo is able to put out what looks best while Pcars can have unfinished assets in the same like for like pic. It still isn't a "fair" comparison. To me at least....it's PR vs an unfinished game out in the public's hand.
 

Synth

Member
Man you guys are being so ridiculous. It's simply easier and more logical to post GAMEPLAY screenshots like for like.

Restricting the shots to "like for like" images is silly for games that aren't even close to being "like for like". You're basically saying that any game being compared must be forced to try and emulate a Driveclub shot, even if this is not the way the game looks best. That is absolutely stupid for determining what game has better graphics. That's like saying that in a graphics comparison between Half-Life 2 and Doom 3, HL2 must limit itself to a smaller closed in corridors as Doom 3 wouldn't be able to approximate the situations that show Half-Life 2's strengths. It's a ridiculously biased condition to place on a games graphics.

The OP contains a shot of fucking Mario Kart 8 for christ sake! I think no Driveclub shots should be admissible unless they can be closely compared to Mario Kart 8 images.

This is a graphics face-off. Infamous Second Son's photo mode doesn't increase the image quality, add any additional AA, and the DoF is the same kind used in the game, but I wouldn't use photo mode shots to compare it with another game because it's not representative of GAMEPLAY and it makes it harder to compare.

You may not use them, and good for you... but these sorts of shots are used all the damn time to show how good Infamous looks. Shots of Master Chief are constantly used to show the graphics of various Halo games. All people generally care about is that the shot is actually being rendered by the console and is not some FMV swap with "in game" assets, or a photomode shot that completely alters the graphics output because it now has multiple seconds to create the image, rather than having to display it at a playable framerate. These Project Cars images can be done at a playable framerate. Would you discredit an Infamous shot because the player panned the camera to the left? Because that's basically what people here are doing.

And, yes, some gameplay shots of Project Cars have been posted; obviously he's not talking about those ones. The artistic shots just have no reason to be posted in this specific thread. They're awesome, and I enjoy them, but unnecessary for this thread.

This thread is for the purpose of showing off each games graphics, and for people to discuss which they think looks best. The OP didn't state anywhere that each shot had to closely match those of other (specifically Driveclub) shots.. and its good that he didn't, because that's ridiculous and makes this a Driveclub thread rather than a Next-gen racing thread. Let Project Cars fans post whatever they think shows their game looking the best it can. If for some reason this displeases you, feel free to make a new thread once Driveclub comes out, where you attempt to top each of these images by matching them in Driveclub. That should be completely fair.
 

shandy706

Member
I want to do some gameplay scenery shots. Basically driving until I run off the track to do these, LOL. I added gifs as I realize a lot of people don't have the WebM plugin installed.

Forza 5, gameplay with the camera held to the right. F5 has a ton of detail (for track racer).


WebM
http://a.pomf.se/ryehhi.webm

Gif (Big!)
chdwto.gif


WebM
http://a.pomf.se/gizqhb.webm

Gif (Not too big)
omcbvf.gif



This is just a mix of replay/gameplay of me screwing around doing 360s in tight spots.

WebM
http://a.pomf.se/pcdxpq.webm

Gif (Huge!)
pjfajb.gif


That looks really danged good...

You realise that these aren't Forza 5's real graphics right?

LOL, well played. You have those that would believe it's not though. We all know that it's "disappointing" to those that have actually played it ;).

My posts seem to be the most ignored (or at least not quoted) in these threads though. I don't know why.....
 

Synth

Member
Doesn't that kind of prove that Drive Club looks better?, the fact that its only 30fps and PCars is already running at 60fps on PS4 AND has Morpheus support (which needs even more processing power).

No... because Project Cars on PS4 is having all sorts of shit dialled back in favour of 60fps, much like Driveclub would have to in order to hit 60fps on PS4. It's not going to look the same as what people are posting in here.

Some people on here remind me of when i used to post on the 'InCrysis' forums where PC fans had a thread where most of them agreed that GoldenEye on N64 running at 1080p/60fps and good AA (Hypothetically of course) would look better than Killzone 2 on PS3 running at 720p/30fps. No, just no.

Its the same with this. PCars may be able to rub at higher res with better AA etc but Drive Club simply looks better, its graphics are better.

This is silly. A game's overall graphics are a balance of various graphical aspects. Unreal Tournament '99 running in 1080p doesn't look better than Doom 3 running at 720p, but that doesn't mean a Killzone 2 running at 480p would still look better than Halo 4 at 720p. If the resolution was that unimportant to a games graphics then devs would simply run everything at a lower res and use the extra resources for more effects. They don't however because people would say the graphics are shit. Similarly, people wouldn't be giving the Xbox One so much flak for not hitting 1080p if everything else being equal meant that the graphics were no worse.

Forza 5, gameplay with the camera held to the right. F5 has a ton of detail (for track racer).

You realise that these aren't Forza 5's real graphics right?
 

RetroStu

Banned
N. Similarly, people wouldn't be giving the Xbox One so much flak for not hitting 1080p if everything else being equal meant that the graphics were no worse.

Oh come on, 90% of those complaints are fanboy war shite, you only have to look at some of the users saying it to know that.

Anyway i'm not saying IQ isn't important, its just some people think that its the ONLY important thing when comparing different games. I mean yeah this kind of stuff would have more meaning if we were still in the 32bit days and we were comparing PS1 320/240 res games to 640/480 and 800/600 games on PC but we aren't and Drive Club runs at 1080p for christ sake!.
 

fresquito

Member
I disagree. The trees look like 2D pics zooming in the top one (it's PCars that's it ?). The trees look more realistic in the bottom one.

Overall, the lighting in Driveclub is more realistic. PCars has superb cars and wonderful IQ though. They just don't have the budget to make sceneries like Driveclub does (it's a kickstarter after all if I remember correctly...). I think they also target different things since PCars is more a sim while DC is an arcade / car porn game.

DC clearly targets "the most beautiful locations" while PCars focuses more on cars themselves.

We should wait for both releases to compare them anyway.
It's a bit irritating reading comments like these after all that's been said.

People jump to conclusions without even caring to read. That pCARS GIF is pretty old, I don't know how much, maybe six months? Maybe more? In the latest two monthst that particular track has been hugely revamped. People don't want to understand pCARS is a WiP that's exposed in all its uglyness, whereas DC only has shown what the devs wanted to show.

And for all the people claiming that to make a comparison you need actual gameplay shots, you're making a mock of yourselves. This thread is a graphics face-off, those shots only show the fine detail the game has, the huge quality of their assets. That's, gentlemen, graphics.

If you don't like seeing a game that shows a level of detail and an IQ that your beloved game won't have, I'm sorry for you. Nobody is saying enviroments in DC look bad, or lighting is ugly, yet you are all the time undermining all the pCARS strenghts by saying they're not fair. What a childish thing to say.

You try to invalidate all the evidence because they're not taken from actual gameplay, even when there's no other trick than a different camera angle. Then you go on and show GIFs from old builds, running at 10fps, at 640 resolution, 256 colors, and call that a fair comparision.
 

Krisprolls

Banned
It's a bit irritating reading comments like these after all that's been said.

People jump to conclusions without even caring to read. That pCARS GIF is pretty old, I don't know how much, maybe six months? Maybe more? In the latest two monthst that particular track has been hugely revamped. People don't want to understand pCARS is a WiP that's exposed in all its uglyness, whereas DC only has shown what the devs wanted to show.

And for all the people claiming that to make a comparison you need actual gameplay shots, you're making a mock of yourselves. This thread is a graphics face-off, those shots only show the fine detail the game has, the huge quality of their assets. That's, gentlemen, graphics.

If you don't like seeing a game that shows a level of detail and an IQ that your beloved game won't have, I'm sorry for you. Nobody is saying enviroments in DC look bad, or lighting is ugly, yet you are all the time undermining all the pCARS strenghts by saying they're not fair. What a childish thing to say.

You try to invalidate all the evidence because they're taken from actual gameplayl, even when there's no other trick than a different camera angle. Then you go on and show GIFs from old builds, running at 10fps, at 640 resolution, 256 colors, and call that a fair comparision.

Wow... I think you answered to the wrong person, I didn't deny PCars strengths and I'm not the one who talked about screenshots...

I just wrote PCars had a wonderful IQ (I don't see how DC could win on that point compared to a PC game). I just agree with you on that point. Lighting is superb on both games too.

I also said we now should wait for the release to compare them. We definitely agree on all those points. We shouldn't compare those games at all actually since neither of them is final and, as you said, publishers release what they want.
 

~~Hasan~~

Junior Member
aside from that F1 car in the rain gif for Pcars, all other gifs and screen shots makes me believe Drive Club look better. that's IMO ofcourse.

I cant WAIT to see Forza Horizon 2
 

fresquito

Member
Wow... I think you answered to the wrong person, I didn't deny PCars strengths and I'm not the one who talked about screenshots...

I just wrote PCars had a wonderful IQ (I don't see how DC could win on that point compared to a PC game). I just agree with you on that point. Lighting is superb on both games too.

I also said we now should wait for the release to compare them. We definitely agree on all those points. We shouldn't compare those games at all actually since neither of them is final and, as you said, publishers release what they want.
Sorry. Just the first part of my post was addressed at you, up until "and for all the people...". Should have made it more clear.
 

Synth

Member
Oh come on, 90% of those complaints are fanboy war shite, you only have to look at some of the users saying it to know that.

Anyway i'm not saying IQ isn't important, its just some people think that its the ONLY important thing when comparing different games. I mean yeah this kind of stuff would have more meaning if we were still in the 32bit days and we were comparing PS1 320/240 res games to 640/480+ games on PC but we aren't and Drive Club runs at 1080p for christ sake!.

I don't think anyone here actually is saying that IQ is the only important aspect of a game's graphics. However, it definitely has the ability to make one game look better than another, providing other areas of a game's graphics aren't like a generation apart. If someone asked me if I think Mario Kart 8 has better graphics than Sonic Racing Transformed, my answer would depend on the SART's version. Console version? Hell yes, Mario Kart looks better... but versus what SART looks like when I play the PC version? Nope. Not at all. The fancier lighting of MK8 isn't enough to match the IQ increase provided by Sonic Racing... and it's not really close. I fully expect to find the PS4 version of Project Cars to look inferior to Driveclub, but that's not the PC version's problem.

It's also not just resolution either. Project Cars also excels in polycounts and texture detail, and AA. Forza 5 is also 1080p, but that doesn't mean it has image quality comparable to Projects Cars running at 1080p, with 16xAF and godly AA applied. These things have a large impact on graphics and outside of lighting and trees, Project Cars is significantly ahead in pretty much every other possible area.
 

RetroStu

Banned
I don't think anyone here actually is saying that IQ is the only important aspect of a game's graphics. However, it definitely has the ability to make one game look better than another, providing other areas of a game's graphics aren't like a generation apart. If someone asked me if I think Mario Kart 8 has better graphics than Sonic Racing Transformed, my answer would depend on the SART's version. Console version? Hell yes, Mario Kart looks better... but versus what SART looks like when I play the PC version? Nope. Not at all. The fancier lighting of MK8 isn't enough to match the IQ increase provided by Sonic Racing... and it's not really close. I fully expect to find the PS4 version of Project Cars to look inferior to Driveclub, but that's not the PC version's problem.

It's also not just resolution either. Project Cars also excels in poly counts and texture detail, and AA. Forza 5 is also 1080p, but that doesn't mean it has image quality comparable to Projects Cars running at 1080p, with 16xAF and godly AA applied. These things have a large impact on graphics and outside of lighting and trees, Project Cars is significantly ahead in pretty much every other possible area.

Well its all opinions isn't it but i judge graphics more by things like polygon counts, texture detail and quality, special effects, lighting, framerate (which PCars is better at to be fair) and that sort of stuff, stuff you can still see regardless of what res you are playing at.

Seriously i know its not the kind of opinion that is liked on here but honestly when i'm lying on my bed 8 feet away from my tv, i find it hard to see the difference between 720p and 1080p for example, if i get up and move closer to my tv then i can for sure but thats why i prefer to view other factors when judging graphics.
 

RoKKeR

Member
Those Forza .gifs done by Shandy above are gray. Popped the game in yesterday and forgot how great it looked. Very clean and smooth. Sterile in some spots and obviously lacking a lot of stuff like weather and dynamic lighting from PCars and DC, but it's a good looking game that gets too much flack here IMO.
 
I
People jump to conclusions without even caring to read. That pCARS GIF is pretty old, I don't know how much, maybe six months? Maybe more? In the latest two monthst that particular track has been hugely revamped. People don't want to understand pCARS is a WiP that's exposed in all its uglyness, whereas DC only has shown what the devs wanted to show.

This is what I don't get. It seems that any time anyone levels any criticism against pCARS the immediate response is "It's not finished!". If the game is in such an incomplete state then why keep posting media? At the end of the day people can only judge what they see. If Slightly Mad is okay with releasing content that content into the game then that's what people are going to judge when it's posted in a graphics comparison thread. Last year DRIVECLUB took quite a beating for its visuals when it was shown at E3. It was fair criticism because they released that content.

Also, anyone that's followed Evolution's games know that their games evolved quite a bit over time in development. So far each time they've shown DRIVECLUB it's looked much better than it did the time before. And that's exactly what happened with Motorstorm as well. So, even what you're seeing with DC isn't really complete. It's still a work in progress as well.
 

fresquito

Member
This is what I don't get. It seems that any time anyone levels any criticism against pCARS the immediate response is "It's not finished!". If the game is in such an incomplete state then why keep posting media? At the end of the day people can only judge what they see. If Slightly Mad is okay with releasing content that content into the game then that's what people are going to judge when it's posted in a graphics comparison thread. Last year DRIVECLUB took quite a beating for its visuals when it was shown at E3. It was fair criticism because they released that content.

Also, anyone that's followed Evolution's games know that their games evolved quite a bit over time in development. So far each time they've shown DRIVECLUB it's looked much better than it did the time before. And that's exactly what happened with Motorstorm as well. So, even what you're seeing with DC isn't really complete. It's still a work in progress as well.
First: There's an updated version of that track. Would you think it is fair to compare pCARS in his actual form to E3 build of DC? Then how is it fair to compare an old build of a track to recent DC footage?

Second: Nobody is complaining about criticising pCARS. I complain about people drawing conclusions. It's different. People watch unfinished footage, not controlled by anyone, and draw conclusions. Like trees in pCARS are bad. Well, some are bad, some are not, since there're 3D trees and there're 2D trees and there're placeholder trees as well.

You can criticise trees in pCARS, but drawing the conclusion that trees in pCARS are bad because the footage you based your judgement on showcases placeholder trees is wrong. And I'm not defending the trees in pCARS, I'm just stating the obvious.
 

drexplora

Member
Well its all opinions isn't it but i judge graphics more by things like polygon counts, texture detail and quality, special effects, lighting, framerate (which PCars is better at to be fair) and that sort of stuff, stuff you can still see regardless of what res you are playing at.

Seriously i know its not the kind of opinion that is liked on here but honestly when i'm lying on my bed 8 feet away from my tv, i find it hard to see the difference between 720p and 1080p for example, if i get up and move closer to my tv then i can for sure but thats why i prefer to view other factors when judging graphics.

u must be the chosen one!
Forget 1080p..
When the world upgrades to 4k you'll be good with 720p right??
when we move to 8k youll laff at all the money we spend on the latest tech?!

Just make sure u don't move from ur spot!!
 

RetroStu

Banned
u must be the chosen one!
Forget 1080p..
When the world upgrades to 4k you'll be good with 720p right??
when we move to 8k youll laff at all the money we spend on the latest tech?!

Just make sure u don't move from ur spot!!

Does any of that change what i said?. No need to talk hyperbole for no reason.
 

drexplora

Member
Does any of that change what i said?. No need to talk hyperbole for no reason.

It's just that image quality is one of the most important aspects when it comes to graphics. It's part of what gives an image that "CG" look.
It is also what get's sacrificed on most console games to the point that it's a foreign concept to the average console player.
 

PetrCobra

Member
They are different times of day though, the Drive Club one is obviously much later in the day.

Anyway when i look at those small gifs, i could quite easily believe that the Drive Club gif was a video taken from inside a car, i couldn't with the PCars gif which still has that obvious videogame look to it.

I don't know. Looking at these particular gifs, both have the videogame look, I don't think I would mistake any of them for a real video TBH. There are some screens in this thread that are VERY close though. Mainly some of the close-ups.
 

Afrikan

Member
Which is which? The lighting model seems better on the bottom one, but I think the top one nailed better the realistic tone.

I swear I will buy Project Cars just for that California track.

as far as your post, I think it just depends on the setting....like the top one is most likely noon.

We have seen similar time settings with DriveClub....and it looks just as realistic.

car2biutm.gif

005-2_zpsbd5b3268.gif
 

meta4

Junior Member
Drive Club has better environments and better lighting than pcars. Are people seriously still debating this?
pcars has better looking cars though. Atleast so far..
 

p3tran

Banned
It's just that image quality is one of the most important aspects when it comes to graphics. It's part of what gives an image that "CG" look.
It is also what get's sacrificed on most console games to the point that it's a foreign concept to the average console player.

given that we are discussing on a very specific subject and not in general, I have to disagree

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwCCVal08yU

and versus the real thing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Jc_DBzRNjE
 

Cygnus

Banned
Some images that I think could actually be mistaken for real life are

Did T10 up the smoke in Forza 5 recently? when i played it a while back there was almost no smoke coming out of the rear tyres..maybe its because i was racing with ai?

I know it's still not a lot but definitely more than when i played it
 

Gestault

Member
Did T10 up the smoke in Forza 5 recently? when i played it a while back there was almost no smoke coming out of the rear tyres..maybe its because i was racing with ai?

I know it's still not a lot but definitely more than when i played it

I'm not sure, I think a big part of it is rubber-type on tires, RWD/FWD/AWD, and how much grip you have when you hit the gas. The quality on this is crap, but this was how it looked around launch. The little annoying puffs still show up sometimes, but it was definitely handled better.

ibvDarxN3rMhIt.gif
 

nib95

Banned
Nib... just buy yourself a nice PC, pick up an Oculus Rift consumer version when it releases, and enjoy a next gen driving experience with PCars sooner rather than later. Then you won't feel so pressured to justify your emotional investment into Sony.

I have a rig with a 3.9ghz i7, 12GB ram, multiple SSD drives, a GTX 570 SSC and a twin monitor set up (Dell U2413 and HP LP2475w) etc. Not exactly a beast, but certainly not inadequate either. I do still play PC games, just not as often as I used to two years or more ago.
 
Top Bottom